VETO' POWER IN THE SECURITY COUNCIL: AN EVALUATION

This article provides a critical evaluation of the veto power held by the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. It traces the historical origins of the veto, examining the rationale behind its inclusion in the UN Charter at the San Francisco Conference. The study analyzes the patterns of veto use throughout the Cold War, identifying the key issues and geopolitical contexts in which it has been employed. The paper assesses the impact of the veto on the Security Council's ability to maintain international peace and security, arguing that while intended as a tool for great power consensus, it has often led to institutional paralysis in the face of major crises. The research also explores various proposals for reforming or limiting the veto power to enhance the Council's effectiveness and legitimacy.

The veto power of the Permanent Five (P5) members is arguably the most controversial and consequential feature of the United Nations Security Council. This paper undertakes a thorough evaluation of its history, application, and impact on international peace and security. The analysis begins with a historical overview, detailing the negotiations at Dumbarton Oaks and Yalta that led to the veto's incorporation into the UN Charter, framing it as a pragmatic compromise to ensure the participation of the world's major powers. The core of the study is a quantitative and qualitative analysis of veto usage from 1945 to the mid-1980s. It identifies trends in its use by different P5 members, correlates its frequency with the intensity of the Cold War, and categorizes the types of resolutions most commonly vetoed, from membership applications to interventions in regional conflicts. The paper critically assesses the consequences of the veto, presenting case studies where its use (or the threat of its use) has prevented the Council from taking decisive action to stop aggression or mass atrocities. In its concluding section, the article examines the persistent debate on Security Council reform, evaluating the feasibility and potential impact of various proposals, from the abolition of the veto to the creation of new categories of membership. It argues that while reform is politically difficult, a continuous evaluation of the veto's function is essential for the credibility of the UN system.